On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 03:18:26PM -0500, Jeff Hostetler wrote: > > Sorry, I hadn't gotten around to looking at the latest version. I left > > another round of comments. Some of them are arguably bikeshedding, but > > there's at least one I think we'd want to address (the big stack buffer > > in patch 1). > > > > I also haven't carefully looked at the simple-ipc design at all; my > > focus has just been on the details of socket and pktline code being > > touched. Since there are no simple-ipc users yet, and since it's > > internal and would be easy to change later, I'm mostly content for Jeff > > to proceed as he sees fit and iterate on it as necessary. > > We can wait until next week on moving this 'next' if you want. > I'll attend to the buffer alloc in patch 1. I'm still reading the > other comments and will see where that takes me. I could have been a bit more clear here: modulo any response you have to my latest round of comments, I'm mostly happy to let this proceed to next. So I was thinking you'd have one more re-roll dealing with the patch 1 problems plus anything else you think worth addressing from my batch of comments, and then that result would probably be ready for 'next'. > I'm about ready to push an RFC for my fsmonitor--daemon series that > sits on top of this simple-ipc series, so you can see an actual use > case if that would help understand (my madness). I may have dug my own grave here. ;) I'm actually not incredibly interested in the overall topic. So I wasn't saying so much "I'll reserve judgement on simple-ipc until I see callers" so much as "I expect you'll find any shortcomings in its design yourself as you build on top of it". And by "not interested" I don't mean that I think the topic is without value. Far from it; I think this is an important area to be working in. But it's complex and time-consuming to review. So I was hoping somebody with more expertise and interest in the problem space would do that part of the review, and I could continue to focus on other stuff. That may be wishful thinking, though. :) -Peff
